Interesting 1200

[lunithy]

http://cosmosamiga.blogspot.com/2011/09/68060100.html

[Hattig]

I wish I had that sort of Amiga in 1996!

[LaserBack]

this overclock is well done and real
sysinfo reports accurate results ..77 mips which is exactly the double which does the 060/50
btw, sysinfo is the only tool that still report correct and accurate cpu test results

2x faster than a 060/50   38.5 mips
2.5x faster than a 040/40mhz  30 mips
4x faster than a 040/25mhz  19 mips
8x faster than 030/50

[zipper]

this overclock is well done and real
sysinfo reports accurate results ..77 mips which is exactly the double which does the 060/50
btw, sysinfo is the only tool that still report correct and accurate cpu test results

which is about half of the "real" mips as only one integer unit is used. SysSpeed gives the "right" figure above 150 if you try it - I believe.

[LaserBack]

which is about half of the "real" mips as only one integer unit is used. SysSpeed gives the "right" figure above 150 if you try it - I believe.

sysspeed or aibb reports wrong and inaccurate results

for example sysspeed on a 040/40 mhz reports 28 mips and on a 060/50 reports 66 mips..so means is about 2.5x faster....
that's totally inaccurate...cause the 060/50 is not 2.x faster than the 040/40....only 1.3x faster
also on winuae sysspeed reports wrong and inaccurate results ...it is a really buggy tool

[Cosmos Amiga]

I tried with a 110 Mhz crystal and a 3.5v regulator, but no boot with or without any Simms...

[LaserBack]

I tried with a 110 Mhz crystal and a 3.5v regulator, but no boot with or without any Simms...

maybe you can create your own regulator using a LM317 transistor and using a variable resistor you can create and try different voltages examples 3.35, 3.4, 3.40,3.45
also you must connect a big capacitor there to smooth that 3.3v  or 3.x line...something like 4700 mf or more .....if you do not use a big cap that line will not be enough stable for an overclocked 060

[AndyLandy]

sysspeed or aibb reports wrong and inaccurate results

for example sysspeed on a 040/40 mhz reports 28 mips and on a 060/50 reports 66 mips..so means is about 2.5x faster....
that's totally inaccurate...cause the 060/50 is not 2.x faster than the 040/40....only 1.3x faster
also on winuae sysspeed reports wrong and inaccurate results ...it is a really buggy tool

Interesting. I'd always heard the complete opposite, that Sysinfo doesn't use the full power of the '060 so always under-scores it, but the other programs can make use of both integer units, so will give a fairer estimate.

[fishy_fiz]

Actually the real truth would be somewhere in between. An '060 is roughly 1.3x as fast as an '040 at same clock speed, which'd make a 50mhz '060 something akin to a 66mhz '040,.... roughly 1.65x the speed on a 40mhz '040.

[AndyLandy]

Actually the real truth would be somewhere in between.

Ain't that always the way?

[Kawazu]

Interesting. I'd always heard the complete opposite, that Sysinfo doesn't use the full power of the '060 so always under-scores it, but the other programs can make use of both integer units, so will give a fairer estimate.

You are right.
Dont listen to LaserBack, just read this thread and see for yourself.
Always bashing on everything that aint sysinfo.

http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=59096






From: http://www.amigaspeed.de.vu/

[Vlabguy1]

Neat.. I look forward to the videos..

Rich
ny

[SpeedGeek]

WOW! Good work Cosmos.
 
How could anyone really believe SysInfo is an accurate benchmark program? Would you trust a program which almost always miscalculates the CPU speed? Has a small cachable MIPS benchmark which makes 040 and 060 machines appear much faster than they really are? ...and on my A3000 9 out of 10 times reports N/A for Ramsey and Gary. Maybe thats why its called SysInfo instead of SysBench?

[LaserBack]

You are right.

http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=59096






From: http://www.amigaspeed.de.vu/

don't be idiot what do you think ? that the 060 is a core i7 ? loi
that's graphic results are accurate of course were not done with the buggy sysspeed
and you can see I'm right that the 060/50 is only 1.3x faster than the 040/040
sysspeed reports 28 mips on the 040/40 and 66mips on the 060/50 and that's totally out of range and giving the 040 a weak weak integer result
to make sure what I'm talking about anyone can get sysspeed modules of both processors on aminet and compare

http://aminet.net/util/moni/A1240_040.lha
http://aminet.net/util/moni/A2k_50_60_Bliz.lha

[stefcep2]

MIPS=meaningless indicator of performance.

Other than MIPS what else makes people think the 68060 @50 mhz is only 1.3 times faster than a 68040@40 mhz?